Linbeymusol Wonderful character development!

Comwayon A Disappointing Continuation

Livestonth I am only giving this movie a 1 for the great cast, though I can't imagine what any of them were thinking. This movie was horrible

Asad Almond A clunky actioner with a handful of cool moments.

christopher-underwood I was immediately captivated by Katharine Hepburn's early monologue and the astonishingly well written play (Tennessee Williams) and screenplay (Gore Vidal) held me agog until Elizabeth Taylor's towards the end. It is an amazing start and a triumphant end whilst almost everything in-between is as good. The dialogue simply tingles the spine with its humour, doom laden gothic horror and barely believable implied depravity. I once thought fans that spoke of 'loving' a certain actress and being able to watch/listen to them all the time were having me on, if not themselves, but I have it for Elizabeth Taylor. I watch in awe as she spills out her character and imbues already dramatic scripts with even more involving and inspiring emotions. And, she looks fantastic. I thought she looked amazing in the early institution scenes and then she is glammed up! A great play given the very best treatment here and if Montgomery Clift was suffering during his performance he is still very effective in what he is asked to do, which as it involves mediating between the two ladies is no mean feat. Excellent.

Thomas Drufke I've never been one to try and directly connect behind the scenes issues to the content of a film, but it's difficult to imagine the two not having a significant impact on each other with Suddenly, Last Summer. With the controversial subject matter, undertones of homosexuality and incest, and a crew that didn't necessarily get along with each other, the result should be nothing short of fascinating. That's exactly what you get with this adaptation. With that said, anytime you have an adaptation of a Tennessee Williams play, you know the dialogue will be extremely well written. Tack on the likes of Katharine Hepburn, Elizabeth Taylor, and Montgomery Clift, and you have the group of actors who can effectively monologue for scene after scene. The actors may not have gotten along with the director and vice versa, but they produced one heck of team nonetheless. At the same time, I think the film is only as interesting as the behind the scenes troubles. It's a unique story on its own sure, but it's instantly more intriguing once you hear about how poorly Clift was treated on set, the film's trouble with the production code, and how Katharine Hepburn apparently spat on director Joseph L. Mankiewicz's face after shooting had included. In that sense, the film grows in your mind as a tale of the sad realities of Hollywood filmmaking, especially at that time. It's not completely unheard of to have such production issues now in days, but this certainly wasn't the norm back in 1959. The movie itself is an okay thriller, with a more than cautionary (but dated) tale attached, but I can't help but keep my mind on the behind the scenes issues.7.3/10

smatysia Another Tennessee Williams drama, rich with conflict and symbolism. I'll not offer a plot synopsis, as many previous commentators have done so, far better than I could. There were exceptional performances, as one would expect, from Elizabeth Taylor and Katherine Hepburn. A more pedestrian performance from Montgomery Clift, and an interesting Albert Dekker playing a bit against type. The events begin with revelations of Hepburn's Violet Venable and her creepily inappropriate relationship with her adult son, a "poet". While almost certainly not actually incestuous, it was weird and icky. It turns out that the son was gay, a not really open concept in 1937, or 1959 for that matter. There appears to be a lot of Freudian symbolism, which was much in vogue at the time, and I recommend reading the comments on the message board for a lot of thoughts on that. But the film, while having a fair amount of monologues, as adaptations from theater often do, is still an intense psychological drama.

howardeisman Ironically, Elizabeth Taylor, who plays a woman who is used as a decoy to attract young men in this film, was also used to attract customers to the film. The film was advertised with a picture of Elizabeth in a bathing suit. She was a wonder of nature, indeed.This was made during the heyday of psychoanalysis. The psychoanalysts felt free to talk about cannibalistic fantasies, relating them to everything from their beloved Oedipus complex to hot dog eating contests.Thus, the cannibal behavior was a familiar trope to that segment of the population who were likely to see this movie. It wouldn't have been strange at all.Family members regularly interfe3rred with the treatment of mental patients in the era which is depicted in the film. This would not have seemed strange to a 1960 audience either.Nevertheless, the whole endeavor still came across as overheated pretentious nonsense. Hepburn was being uberHepburn, Taylor was also over the top at times, and Clift seemed so lost that he looked like he was a patient at the institution.